docs(planning): de-risk xAI Tesla authority lane
This commit is contained in:
Shay
parent
240c1183cc
commit
71b84d3218
14 changed files with 238 additions and 23 deletions
|
|
@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ To maintain a safe, inspectable, and reproducible environment, this demo operate
|
|||
* **No Network Calls:** All evaluations are local. No external API requests are made.
|
||||
* **No Shell Execution:** No shell commands, terminal invocations, or process spawns.
|
||||
* **No Real Mail:** Mock email tools do not transmit network packets or send messages.
|
||||
* **No Live Model API:** Uses static, pre-recorded proposer fixtures instead of querying OpenAI, Anthropic, or SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] servers.
|
||||
* **No Live Model API:** Uses static, pre-recorded proposer fixtures instead of querying OpenAI, Anthropic, or xAI / frontier model providers.
|
||||
* **No Production MCP Claim:** Demonstrates the conceptual boundary pattern, not a production-grade Model Context Protocol server.
|
||||
* **Deterministic Artifacts:** The output is fully predictable, producing byte-identical traces on repeat runs.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -21,8 +21,8 @@ We would appreciate your thoughts on:
|
|||
3. The integration boundaries between stochastic planning engines and low-level deterministic safety filters (like Control Barrier Functions).
|
||||
|
||||
Our project positioning and specs are detailed in these summaries:
|
||||
* [xai-core-one-pager](file:///Users/kaizenpro/.gemini/antigravity/worktrees/core/core-outreach-xai-tesla/docs/outreach/xai-core-one-pager-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
* [tesla-embodied-authority-one-pager](file:///Users/kaizenpro/.gemini/antigravity/worktrees/core/core-outreach-xai-tesla/docs/outreach/tesla-embodied-authority-one-pager-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
* See: docs/outreach/xai-core-one-pager-2026-06-11.md
|
||||
* See: docs/outreach/tesla-embodied-authority-one-pager-2026-06-11.md
|
||||
|
||||
If you are open to a brief async thread or review, please let me know.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ We do not write robotics controllers or vehicle autonomy software, and we do not
|
|||
|
||||
We would value a hard technical critique of this authority-boundary design pattern from engineers working on the front lines of robotics and autonomy.
|
||||
|
||||
If you have a moment, our short technical memo is here: [tesla-embodied-authority-one-pager](file:///Users/kaizenpro/.gemini/antigravity/worktrees/core/core-outreach-xai-tesla/docs/outreach/tesla-embodied-authority-one-pager-2026-06-11.md).
|
||||
If you have a moment, our short technical memo is here (See: docs/outreach/tesla-embodied-authority-one-pager-2026-06-11.md).
|
||||
|
||||
Best regards,
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ We’ve recently demonstrated this boundary pattern in a hybrid verification dem
|
|||
|
||||
We are not looking for fundraising or pitching a product. We would simply value a technical sanity check from engineers thinking seriously about truth-seeking AI, agent reliability, and high-consequence autonomy.
|
||||
|
||||
If you have 10 minutes, I’d appreciate your feedback on our positioning: [xai-core-one-pager](file:///Users/kaizenpro/.gemini/antigravity/worktrees/core/core-outreach-xai-tesla/docs/outreach/xai-core-one-pager-2026-06-11.md).
|
||||
If you have 10 minutes, I’d appreciate your feedback on our positioning (See: docs/outreach/xai-core-one-pager-2026-06-11.md).
|
||||
|
||||
Best regards,
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -112,6 +112,17 @@ Status: Active
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Phase 8 — Objections / Answers
|
||||
|
||||
[ ] Confirm objections sheet exists and is up to date
|
||||
[ ] Verify Anthropic-specific objections answered
|
||||
[ ] Ensure no overclaim language in objections and answers
|
||||
[ ] Audit to ensure no "solves alignment" claims exist
|
||||
[ ] Audit to ensure no "production MCP" claims exist
|
||||
[ ] Audit to ensure no "absolute safety guarantee" claims exist
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Exit Criteria
|
||||
|
||||
Ready when:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -185,6 +185,29 @@ Planned:
|
|||
6. xAI packet
|
||||
7. Embodied authority memo
|
||||
|
||||
# xAI / Tesla Lane Deliverables (Branch)
|
||||
|
||||
All 13 drafted files for this lane are available on the branch `docs/xai-tesla-lane-first-pass-2026-06-11`:
|
||||
|
||||
### Planning & Context
|
||||
1. Current Context Audit: [docs/planning/xai-tesla-current-context-2026-06-11.md](docs/planning/xai-tesla-current-context-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
2. CORE Positioning Memo: [docs/planning/xai-tesla-core-positioning-2026-06-11.md](docs/planning/xai-tesla-core-positioning-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
3. Three Pillars of Authority: [docs/planning/xai-tesla-three-authority-pillars-2026-06-11.md](docs/planning/xai-tesla-three-authority-pillars-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
4. SaaS / On-Prem Boundary Memo: [docs/planning/saas-onprem-authority-boundary-2026-06-11.md](docs/planning/saas-onprem-authority-boundary-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
5. Objection / Answer Sheet: [docs/planning/xai-tesla-objections-and-answers-2026-06-11.md](docs/planning/xai-tesla-objections-and-answers-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
6. Red-Team Report: [docs/planning/xai-tesla-red-team-report-2026-06-11.md](docs/planning/xai-tesla-red-team-report-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
|
||||
### Outreach Materials
|
||||
7. xAI / Grok One-Pager: [docs/outreach/xai-core-one-pager-2026-06-11.md](docs/outreach/xai-core-one-pager-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
8. Tesla / Embodied One-Pager: [docs/outreach/tesla-embodied-authority-one-pager-2026-06-11.md](docs/outreach/tesla-embodied-authority-one-pager-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
9. xAI Short-Note Draft: [docs/outreach/xai-short-note-draft-2026-06-11.md](docs/outreach/xai-short-note-draft-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
10. Tesla Robotics Short-Note Draft: [docs/outreach/tesla-robotics-short-note-draft-2026-06-11.md](docs/outreach/tesla-robotics-short-note-draft-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
11. Technical Reviewer Short-Note Draft: [docs/outreach/technical-reviewer-short-note-draft-2026-06-11.md](docs/outreach/technical-reviewer-short-note-draft-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
|
||||
### Demo Specifications
|
||||
12. Embodied Authority Simulation Demo Spec: [docs/demo/embodied-authority-simulation-demo-spec-2026-06-11.md](docs/demo/embodied-authority-simulation-demo-spec-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
13. Tool Authority Demo Spec: [docs/demo/tool-authority-demo-spec-2026-06-11.md](docs/demo/tool-authority-demo-spec-2026-06-11.md)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Model Allocation Strategy
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
47
docs/planning/DEMO-PACKAGING-CHECKLIST.md
Normal file
47
docs/planning/DEMO-PACKAGING-CHECKLIST.md
Normal file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
|
|||
# Public Demo Packaging Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
This checklist applies to public CORE demos.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Demo purpose is stated narrowly.
|
||||
- [ ] Demo status is clear: merged, draft PR, proposed, or not yet implemented.
|
||||
- [ ] README includes "what this proves."
|
||||
- [ ] README includes "what this does not prove."
|
||||
- [ ] README avoids named-company outreach strategy.
|
||||
- [ ] README avoids funding, sponsorship, runway, or executive-packet language.
|
||||
|
||||
## Safety boundary
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] No real external side effects.
|
||||
- [ ] No network dependency.
|
||||
- [ ] No model API dependency.
|
||||
- [ ] No shell execution unless the demo explicitly exists to test shell-denial behavior.
|
||||
- [ ] No production MCP claim.
|
||||
- [ ] MCP-shaped interfaces are described as MCP-shaped, not production MCP.
|
||||
- [ ] Simulation-only demos are labeled simulation-only.
|
||||
- [ ] Proposed demos are not described as implemented.
|
||||
|
||||
## Determinism
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Runner output is deterministic.
|
||||
- [ ] Expected artifacts are pinned.
|
||||
- [ ] Double-run behavior is byte-identical where applicable.
|
||||
- [ ] Trace hashes are deterministic.
|
||||
- [ ] No timestamp, random, host-path, or environment-dependent output appears in expected artifacts.
|
||||
|
||||
## Authority boundary
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Proposer input cannot set final authority status.
|
||||
- [ ] Proposer input cannot smuggle final action artifacts.
|
||||
- [ ] Invalid payloads fail closed.
|
||||
- [ ] Refusal and ask outcomes are first-class successes.
|
||||
- [ ] Authorized outputs, if present, are inert artifacts unless a later production system explicitly implements execution.
|
||||
|
||||
## Public hygiene
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] No named-person outreach planning.
|
||||
- [ ] No named-company approach strategy.
|
||||
- [ ] No private red-team personas.
|
||||
- [ ] No speculative current-facts dossiers.
|
||||
- [ ] No claims of robotics, vehicle, aerospace, defense, or safety-certified deployment unless directly implemented and independently verified.
|
||||
127
docs/planning/PUBLIC-DEMO-ROADMAP.md
Normal file
127
docs/planning/PUBLIC-DEMO-ROADMAP.md
Normal file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,127 @@
|
|||
# Public Demo Roadmap
|
||||
|
||||
This document tracks public, evidence-oriented CORE demos. It intentionally excludes private outreach strategy, named-company planning, fundraising material, and executive packet work.
|
||||
|
||||
## Public boundary
|
||||
|
||||
Public repository docs may describe:
|
||||
|
||||
- implemented demos;
|
||||
- proposed demos;
|
||||
- deterministic test requirements;
|
||||
- trace artifacts;
|
||||
- honesty ledgers;
|
||||
- public-safe architecture boundaries.
|
||||
|
||||
Public repository docs must not include:
|
||||
|
||||
- named-company outreach strategy;
|
||||
- named-person contact plans;
|
||||
- sponsorship or runway asks;
|
||||
- private packet planning;
|
||||
- company-specific red-team personas;
|
||||
- current-facts dossiers for outreach.
|
||||
|
||||
## Demonstrated
|
||||
|
||||
### Hybrid Verification Demo
|
||||
|
||||
Status: merged.
|
||||
|
||||
Purpose: demonstrate a bounded proposer-to-substrate verification path with typed outcomes.
|
||||
|
||||
Public outcome vocabulary:
|
||||
|
||||
- `verified`
|
||||
- `refused`
|
||||
- `ask`
|
||||
- `invalid`
|
||||
|
||||
Public safety boundary:
|
||||
|
||||
- no model API;
|
||||
- no network;
|
||||
- no external side effects;
|
||||
- deterministic trace artifacts;
|
||||
- honesty ledger included.
|
||||
|
||||
## In progress
|
||||
|
||||
### Tool Authority Demo
|
||||
|
||||
Status: draft PR / in review.
|
||||
|
||||
Purpose: demonstrate that a model-style proposer may submit a typed action proposal, while CORE alone may authorize, ask, refuse, or invalidate.
|
||||
|
||||
Public outcome vocabulary:
|
||||
|
||||
- `authorized`
|
||||
- `ask`
|
||||
- `refused`
|
||||
- `invalid`
|
||||
|
||||
Public safety boundary:
|
||||
|
||||
- no real tool execution;
|
||||
- no real email sending;
|
||||
- no shell execution;
|
||||
- no network;
|
||||
- inert `licensed_action` artifact only;
|
||||
- MCP-shaped, not production MCP.
|
||||
|
||||
## Proposed
|
||||
|
||||
### Epistemic Truth-State Demo
|
||||
|
||||
Status: proposed.
|
||||
|
||||
Purpose: make epistemic state transitions visible and replayable in a public-safe demo.
|
||||
|
||||
Possible states include:
|
||||
|
||||
- perceived;
|
||||
- evidenced;
|
||||
- verified;
|
||||
- inferred;
|
||||
- contradicted;
|
||||
- undetermined;
|
||||
- refused;
|
||||
- ask.
|
||||
|
||||
No claim is made here that the full demo is implemented until a PR lands.
|
||||
|
||||
### Embodied Authority Simulation Demo
|
||||
|
||||
Status: proposed, simulation-only.
|
||||
|
||||
Purpose: demonstrate an authority-boundary pattern for model-proposed simulated transitions.
|
||||
|
||||
Public safety boundary:
|
||||
|
||||
- no real robot;
|
||||
- no real actuator;
|
||||
- no vehicle-control claim;
|
||||
- no production robotics claim;
|
||||
- no certified functional-safety claim;
|
||||
- simulation-only fixtures.
|
||||
|
||||
### SaaS / On-Prem Boundary Demo
|
||||
|
||||
Status: proposed.
|
||||
|
||||
Purpose: demonstrate a public-safe split between coordination metadata and local authority decisions.
|
||||
|
||||
No claim is made here that a production SaaS or on-prem deployment exists.
|
||||
|
||||
## Packaging rule
|
||||
|
||||
Each public demo should include:
|
||||
|
||||
- README;
|
||||
- fixtures;
|
||||
- expected outputs;
|
||||
- deterministic runner;
|
||||
- tests;
|
||||
- honesty ledger;
|
||||
- "what this proves";
|
||||
- "what this does not prove."
|
||||
|
|
@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ Prepare a second outreach lane focused on:
|
|||
|
||||
[ ] Create truth-seeking memo
|
||||
|
||||
[ ] Create local-authority memo
|
||||
[ ] Create local/on-prem authority memo
|
||||
|
||||
[ ] Create embodied-authority memo
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -90,6 +90,13 @@ No deployment claims.
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Phase 5.5 — Red Team
|
||||
|
||||
[ ] Perform red-team review of outreach materials
|
||||
[ ] Resolve overclaims and unverified claims
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# Phase 6 — Outreach
|
||||
|
||||
[ ] xAI outreach draft
|
||||
|
|
@ -112,4 +119,6 @@ Ready when:
|
|||
|
||||
[ ] Evidence packet complete
|
||||
|
||||
[ ] Red-team review complete
|
||||
|
||||
[ ] Outreach package complete
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ To preserve privacy and prevent the leakage of proprietary operational data (e.g
|
|||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Why Customer-Local Authority Matters
|
||||
For organizations like Tesla, SpaceX, or SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH], operational data is highly proprietary and subject to strict security classifications.
|
||||
For organizations operating in xAI / Tesla / SpaceX-adjacent [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] contexts, operational data is highly proprietary and subject to strict security classifications.
|
||||
* **No Data Surrender:** CORE does not require customers to upload raw operational sensor data, camera feeds, or internal source code to a centralized cloud.
|
||||
* **High Availability:** If a Starlink terminal or internet connection drops, the local factory or spacecraft system must continue to enforce safety gates. A cloud-first authority model would brick operations during outages.
|
||||
* **Clear Compliance Boundaries:** Regulated entities can prove compliance to external auditors by demonstrating that their safety policies are enforced locally by an immutable, deterministic engine, with trace hashes verifying that no tampering occurred.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ This memo defines the core positioning of the xAI / Tesla / SpaceX-adjacent outr
|
|||
When communicating within the xAI / Tesla / SpaceX-adjacent lane, outreach materials must maintain a highly technical, objective, and complementary tone. We do not position CORE as a critique of existing systems, but rather as an architectural necessity for high-consequence operations.
|
||||
|
||||
### Do Not Propose:
|
||||
* ❌ *"SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] or xAI needs CORE."*
|
||||
* ❌ *"xAI / Tesla / SpaceX-adjacent systems need CORE."*
|
||||
* ❌ *"Tesla's safety or FSD architecture is broken."*
|
||||
* ❌ *"Elon Musk or xAI failed to build truth-seeking AI."*
|
||||
* ❌ *"CORE is what Grok or OpenAI should have been."*
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,12 +1,10 @@
|
|||
# Current-Facts Audit: SpaceXAI / Tesla / SpaceX-Adjacent Lane
|
||||
# Current-Facts Audit: xAI / Tesla / SpaceX-Adjacent Lane
|
||||
**Date: 2026-06-11**
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. SpaceXAI (xAI / SpaceX Merger) Status [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]
|
||||
* **Corporate Merger:** On February 2, 2026, SpaceX officially acquired and merged with xAI in an all-stock transaction [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]. xAI was dissolved as a standalone corporate entity and integrated directly into SpaceX as a specialized division under the brand name **SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]**.
|
||||
* **Trademarks & Entity Status:** SpaceX has filed trademark applications for the name **SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]** to cover its expanded artificial intelligence and computing infrastructure operations.
|
||||
* **Infrastructure Initiatives:** SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] operates the Colossus supercomputer and is building orbital, solar-powered AI data centers [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] using SpaceX's Starlink satellite network and Starship launch capabilities to address terrestrial energy and cooling limitations. The division also provides compute power and data services to external partners (including infrastructure agreements with Google and Anthropic) [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH].
|
||||
## 1. Corporate Alignment and Shared Infrastructure Context [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]
|
||||
xAI and SpaceX/Tesla are strategically adjacent through Elon Musk’s companies, shared infrastructure ambitions, high-consequence engineering culture, and public AI/autonomy/robotics ambitions. This document does not assume a formal corporate merger or official SpaceXAI entity unless verified by primary sources.
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. Grok's Stated Mission and Role in X / xAI Products
|
||||
* **Stated Mission:** The mission remains "to understand the true nature of the universe," emphasizing first-principles reasoning and scientific inquiry.
|
||||
|
|
@ -16,9 +14,9 @@
|
|||
* **Regulatory Context:** The Privacy Commissioner of Canada launched investigations in early 2026 regarding consent protocols and deepfake generation on X, leading to tighter internal compliance frameworks.
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. Tesla Robotaxi & FSD Safety Context
|
||||
* **NHTSA [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] Engineering Analysis (EA25012 / PE25012):** In March 2026, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]) upgraded its preliminary evaluation into Tesla FSD to a formal Engineering Analysis, covering approximately 3.2 million vehicles. The focus is FSD performance in low-visibility conditions (fog, glare, low light), following nine reported crashes with injuries and one fatality [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH].
|
||||
* **Data Scrutiny:** Regulators are auditing Tesla for potential under-reporting of Autopilot/FSD crashes [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH].
|
||||
* **Austin Robotaxi Operations:** Tesla launched driverless Robotaxi operations in Austin, Texas, in June 2025 and transitioned to fully driverless rides in January 2026 [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]. As of June 2026, the fleet recorded 17 incidents across 800,000 miles [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH].
|
||||
* **Regulatory Safety Inquiries:** The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]) maintains public regulatory scrutiny and safety-review context [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] regarding driver-assist features in various visibility conditions.
|
||||
* **Data Scrutiny:** Regulators are auditing Tesla for potential safety and crash reporting compliance [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH].
|
||||
* **Austin Robotaxi Operations:** Tesla launched driverless Robotaxi operations in Austin, Texas, in June 2025 and transitioned to fully driverless rides in January 2026 [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH], subject to reported safety scrutiny [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH].
|
||||
* **Safety Discrepancies:** Critics and independent safety researchers point out that comparing Tesla's airbag-deployment crash rate to general national crash data (which includes minor fender-benders) presents an incomplete picture, particularly when compared to lidar-based autonomous fleets operating in similar urban settings.
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Tesla Optimus / Humanoid Robotics Deployment Status
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
|
|||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
This document outlines key technical and philosophical objections regarding the integration of CORE with SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] and Tesla platforms, followed by our objective answers.
|
||||
This document outlines key technical and philosophical objections regarding the integration of CORE with xAI / Tesla / SpaceX-adjacent [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] platforms, followed by our objective answers.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -16,13 +16,13 @@ CORE does not interfere with the model's output generation or token distribution
|
|||
No. CORE is entirely complementary to Grok. Grok is designed to be a curious, truth-seeking semantic engine. CORE provides Grok with a formal boundary to verify its claims and safely license its agentic actions (e.g., in Grok-class agentic environments [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] or in-car assistants), preventing semantic curiosity from causing execution errors.
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Does CORE compete with xAI?
|
||||
No. xAI (now part of SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]) focuses on building frontier foundation models with massive parameters. CORE does not build general-purpose foundation models. Instead, CORE is a deterministic, lightweight authority substrate that runs locally to govern model outputs.
|
||||
No. xAI focuses on building frontier foundation models with massive parameters. CORE does not build general-purpose foundation models. Instead, CORE is a deterministic, lightweight authority substrate that runs locally to govern model outputs.
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Does CORE slow down the model?
|
||||
No. CORE is designed to be extremely lightweight, utilizing a deterministic, compile-time semantic representation and local algebraic checks (CGA recall and versor transitions). Unlike model-based safety guardrails (which require additional high-latency LLM calls to evaluate safety), CORE's evaluations execute in milliseconds, running orders of magnitude faster than the proposer's generation step.
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Does CORE work at X/Tesla scale?
|
||||
Yes. Because CORE relies on exact local recall and compact semantic packs rather than heavy vector databases or neural network evaluations, it scales efficiently. A single compiled policy pack can process millions of proposals per second on minimal local compute, making it suitable for high-throughput social feeds or local automotive nodes.
|
||||
Yes. Because CORE relies on exact local recall and compact semantic packs rather than heavy vector databases or neural network evaluations, it scales efficiently. A single compiled policy pack is designed for high-throughput local evaluation; benchmark claims require separate measurement, making it suitable for high-throughput social feeds or local automotive nodes.
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Does CORE require cloud trust?
|
||||
No. CORE enforces local execution authority. All policy evaluation, state checks, and detailed trace logging occur entirely on-premise or on the local device. The cloud control plane is only used to distribute policies and receive redacted proof summaries, ensuring no sensitive operational data leaves the customer's secure environment.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -9,11 +9,11 @@ This report documents a self-directed red-team audit of the draft materials prep
|
|||
|
||||
## 1. Persona Reviews
|
||||
|
||||
### Reviewer 1: xAI (SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]) Technical Reviewer
|
||||
### Reviewer 1: xAI / Tesla / SpaceX-adjacent Technical Reviewer
|
||||
* **Perspective:** Focused on state-of-the-art foundation models, first-principles reasoning, and Colossus scale. Highly skeptical of any external wrapper claiming to "solve" reasoning alignment.
|
||||
* **Audit Feedback:**
|
||||
* *Curiosity Gating:* If the materials implied CORE limits *what* Grok can think or generate, they would be immediately rejected. The distinction in the one-pager ("CORE is not a speech-policing layer. It is an authority-boundary layer.") successfully addresses this, but we must ensure we never refer to CORE as a "filter" or "guardrail" in conversations.
|
||||
* *Terminology:* Since the February 2026 merger, referring to "xAI" without acknowledging the **SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]** brand or the integration into SpaceX [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] could signal outdated context. The current context audit is accurate on this point, but outreach must use "SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]" or "xAI / Tesla / SpaceX-adjacent" consistently.
|
||||
* *Terminology:* Keep references focused on Grok-class systems and xAI / Tesla / SpaceX-adjacent context, avoiding unverified corporate structures.
|
||||
|
||||
### Reviewer 2: Tesla Autonomy Safety Reviewer
|
||||
* **Perspective:** Focused on automotive functional safety (ISO 26262), real-time low-latency constraints, and vision-only path planning. Extremely defensive about safety critiques.
|
||||
|
|
@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ This report documents a self-directed red-team audit of the draft materials prep
|
|||
### Reviewer 5: Legal / Reputation-Risk Reviewer
|
||||
* **Perspective:** Protecting intellectual property and avoiding unauthorized association with trademarked entities.
|
||||
* **Audit Feedback:**
|
||||
* *Entity Association:* Materials must make it clear that CORE is an independent, open-source project and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or partnering with Tesla, SpaceX, or SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH].
|
||||
* *Entity Association:* Materials must make it clear that CORE is an independent, open-source project and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or partnering with Tesla, SpaceX, or xAI.
|
||||
* *Fundraising:* We must not include any investment or fundraising asks in outreach to these teams, to prevent any appearance of exploiting corporate brands for capital generation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
|
@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ This report documents a self-directed red-team audit of the draft materials prep
|
|||
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
|
||||
| **Overclaims of Robotics Control:** Implication that CORE can directly control actuators or drive vehicles. | 🔴 Critical | Added explicit caveats to the Tesla One-Pager and Embodied Demo Spec: *"CORE is not a robotics controller... CORE is not a vehicle autonomy stack."* |
|
||||
| **Implied Censorship:** Appearing to restrict the model's creative or logical reasoning outputs. | 🟡 High | Added dedicated "Censorship" sections in the One-Pager and QA sheet: *"CORE is not a speech-policing layer... A model can still reason, propose, argue..."* |
|
||||
| **Stale Context / SpaceXAI Name:** Using outdated naming or missing the SpaceX merger facts. | 🟢 Medium | Documented the February 2026 merger [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] in the Context Audit and updated naming guidelines to reference the consolidated "SpaceXAI [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH]" division. |
|
||||
| **Naming Strategy:** Using unverified corporate structures or brand names. | 🟢 Medium | Audited and updated naming guidelines to use safe preferred terminology like "xAI / Tesla / SpaceX-adjacent". |
|
||||
| **Citing Rumors or Social Media:** Using unverified tweets or rumors regarding FSD/Optimus. | 🟡 High | Exclusively cited primary sources (NHTSA [VERIFY BEFORE OUTREACH] Engineering Analysis records, official Tesla production updates, peer-reviewed robotics literature). |
|
||||
| **Replacing Certified Safety:** Implication that CORE replaces ISO 26262/13849 safety mechanisms. | 🔴 Critical | Added clear warnings: *"CORE does not replace perception, control theory, redundancy... or regulatory certification."* |
|
||||
| **Pretending to Solve Multimodal Safety:** Claiming CORE handles raw sensor inputs. | 🟢 Medium | Clarified in QA sheet that perception and object classification are out of scope; CORE evaluates parsed schemas. |
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue